Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Neocon's Seminar Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (765)	5/28/2003 7:27:07 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1112

"The heat and the light and the other forms are energy. Its not that you have light and have something associating with the light which we call energy, no the light itself is energy." Yes, this is the position I would expect of any credible scientist. It is based on a plausible assumption that is neither provable nor disprovable. It is pretty much universally accepted. I have taken the counter position for the sake of this argument. That these entities: light, heat, sound, etc, are expressed in the presence of energy but that energy is a separate entity. An entity possibly even undetectable through scientific human effort. This position is not provable either as far as I know. And, I realize that I am availing myself to universal approbrium. There are many things that we are unable to detect using scientific method. We don't detect "sorrow" for example. We find evidence of it in the behavior, attitudes, and morphology of people who present themselves in a certain way but we can't detect with certainty that it exists. We still, however, accept the notion of the existance of this phenomenon, "sorrow" as a separate entity. One that lies beneath the evidential features. Since the possibility of energy being an entity of its own has not been explored, why not give it a go? The force be with you, JOTW